论文部分内容阅读
On December 8, 2011, the Chinese Academy of Engineering (CAE) selected 54 academicians. Xie Jianping, whose research focuses on adding Chinese herbal medicine to cigarettes to reduce tar content, was on the list.
Xie, 52, is widely known for his research on low-tar cigarettes and serves as the deputy head of a tobacco research institute under China National Tobacco Corp., China’s tobacco monopoly and the world’s largest cigarette company. Xie’s election has ignited great controversy.
Supporters say people shouldn’t discriminate against researchers in controversial fields. Xie does not encourage smoking but has done his best to reduce its harm. The tobacco industry is a big one and China cannot eliminate it now.
Opponents decried him as a “tobacco academician” or even “killer academician.” They argue that based on the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), low-tar tobacco advertising is fraudulent and misleads the public, and that it’s impossible to reduce the risks of smoking by picking low-tar cigarettes. Xie’s successful election was criticized as a shame for science, and his research criticized for helping the tobacco industry make profits.
Unfair criticism
Li Qing (Wuhan Evening News): Xie shouldn’t have suffered from questions and criticism. It’s not fair to him. First, he is not a scientist bought over by tobacco companies but has been a tobacco researcher for a very long time.
Second, what he does is not promoting smoking but is reducing the harm of smoking to the greatest extent. Shouldn’t he be praised for trying to do so? If he can play a positive role in protecting people’s health by developing low-tar cigarettes, why can’t he be elected as an academician?
Han Qing (Yangtze Evening News): We shouldn’t mix science with morality and take out our complaints and anger on an innocent individual. Decrying Xie as a “tobacco academician” or even “killer academician” is moral criticism and is beyond science. If we want to judge whether low-tar is effective in reducing the risks of smoking, we should observe data and statistics of experiments.
So far as I know, the election system of the CAE doesn’t restrict candidates’ research fields. Besides, only academicians can vote for candidates without collecting public opinion. If people have complaints about those rules, they can discuss them with the CAE and suggest revising them. But it’s a totally different issue from Xie’s election. People shouldn’t have criticized Xie based on rules that they assume appropriate. Also, they shouldn’t have criticized Xie as if they are more noble than him.
Wang Guorong (Qianjiang Evening News): Smoking is bad for health. Therefore, we do need research on how to reduce the risk of it to the greatest extent. It’s unrealistic to eliminate the tobacco industry within a short period of time or to ask all smokers to quit as soon as possible. If smoking can’t be banned for now, isn’t it a good thing to research how to reduce its harm? Before being elected, Xie received many national prizes and has been an outstanding contributor for China’s tobacco system for 19 years. He didn’t encourage people to smoke but has made efforts on how to reduce its harm. There are hundreds of millions of smokers in China, and studies on how to reduce the harm of it are quite necessary.
If you have an opinion on smoking, you shouldn’t take your anger out on Xie. It’s not right to give him such harsh criticism.
Shameful election
Xu Guihua (news.xinhuanet.com): Low-tar doesn’t mean less harm. Using low-tar cigarettes to reduce the risks of smoking was long ago proven unscientific. In the 1950s, in order to maintain profits for the tobacco industry, European and American tobacco companies started to research low-tar cigarettes and used them in their promotional efforts. For more than 50 years, the percent of tar in cigarettes has been reduced by nearly 60 percent but the resulting diseases haven’t lessened at all. Facing scientific evidence, tobacco companies have to admit reducing the risks of smoking by using low-tar cigarettes has been a total failure. The WHO has warned that all tobacco products, including low-tar ones, are harmful to human health. In 2005, China ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, endorsing guidelines for its implementation with government support. It’s a pity that Xie could still be elected academician six years after the convention was ratified in China.
The promotion of low-tar cigarettes has misled the public. An investigation conducted by the University of Waterloo in Canada shows 86 percent of Chinese agree with the concept of “lower tar, less harm” and 54 percent of doctors even agree with it. The misleading promotion has added to difficulties in the country’s smoking-control efforts.
In the future, the government should curtail funding on research that has been banned by a WHO-initiated treaty, and should put the money to better use for implementing the convention in China and reducing the number of smokers by helping them quit in a better and more efficient way.
Pan Hongqi (Beijing Youth Daily): Questioning the tobacco academician is bringing back the truth and conscience of science. What people really care about is whether Xie’s research has really made tremendous and creative contributions to reducing the harm of cigarettes and protecting people’s health.
The WHO has emphasized many times that all tobacco products, including low-tar cigarettes, are harmful for human beings. It’s quite irresponsible for the elite CAE to give Xie the title of academician. It will discredit China’s smoking-control efforts, which need concerted strength from all circles of society. It will bring a misleading concept for common people and have huge negative influence for the smoking-control authorities in the country.
Wang Shichuan (China Youth Daily): Xie’s research involves studies on human health and his election should have been approved by prestigious experts working in the medical field.
Xie is famous for his research on reducing the harm of cigarettes. But the FCTC has specifically pointed out that any terms about low-tar cigarettes are fake and misleading to smokers. Further evidence is that the death rate of lung cancer has increased rapidly over these years.
This is not the first time that Xie became one of the candidates for the CAE academi- cians. Xie applied for the honor in 2007, 2009 and 2011. Why should he be successfully elected this time but not four years ago or two years ago? It’s impossible that his research achievements have changed a lot during this short period of time.
Although Xie is only a researcher, the institute he works for is affiliated with the China National Tobacco Corp. Once Xie is widely known as a CAE academician, the concept of “low-tar cigarettes” will be legitimized. Tobacco companies who use “lowtar” in their promotional activities will have more courage and evidence to do it in the future. Smokers will have more reasons to avoid quitting the bad habit because they will assume low-tar will bring less harm to their bodies. All these will make the tobacco industry more powerful and help smoking expand more quickly in China.
Qiao Hongge (Shanxi Evening News): Academician is the highest honor for scientists in China. It shouldn’t be an honor that can be given as a present randomly but should be conferred to the best researcher. And “best”means his or her research fruits should give ordinary people more happiness, push forward social progress and help the development of all human beings. It’s almost a laughing stock that a scientist working on tobacco science could be given a seat in the elite CAE.
Besides, it is an internationally common practice that science and research institutes should distance themselves from tobacco interests while, in this case, the institute Xie works for is affiliated to China’s largest to- bacco company and most of its research is sponsored by the tobacco industry. How can we believe in the results of Xie’s research?
Wang Ke’an (China Youth Daily): In foreign countries, the government should never sponsor this kind of research, which not only doesn’t protect people’s health but could increase the number of smokers. Researchers in the United States discovered that low-tar cigarettes don’t reduce the risk of lung cancer.
There is no safe level of tobacco consumption. Smokers are more likely to inhale more when they consume low-tar cigarettes, and that actually increases the health risks.
Xie, 52, is widely known for his research on low-tar cigarettes and serves as the deputy head of a tobacco research institute under China National Tobacco Corp., China’s tobacco monopoly and the world’s largest cigarette company. Xie’s election has ignited great controversy.
Supporters say people shouldn’t discriminate against researchers in controversial fields. Xie does not encourage smoking but has done his best to reduce its harm. The tobacco industry is a big one and China cannot eliminate it now.
Opponents decried him as a “tobacco academician” or even “killer academician.” They argue that based on the World Health Organization (WHO) Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), low-tar tobacco advertising is fraudulent and misleads the public, and that it’s impossible to reduce the risks of smoking by picking low-tar cigarettes. Xie’s successful election was criticized as a shame for science, and his research criticized for helping the tobacco industry make profits.
Unfair criticism
Li Qing (Wuhan Evening News): Xie shouldn’t have suffered from questions and criticism. It’s not fair to him. First, he is not a scientist bought over by tobacco companies but has been a tobacco researcher for a very long time.
Second, what he does is not promoting smoking but is reducing the harm of smoking to the greatest extent. Shouldn’t he be praised for trying to do so? If he can play a positive role in protecting people’s health by developing low-tar cigarettes, why can’t he be elected as an academician?
Han Qing (Yangtze Evening News): We shouldn’t mix science with morality and take out our complaints and anger on an innocent individual. Decrying Xie as a “tobacco academician” or even “killer academician” is moral criticism and is beyond science. If we want to judge whether low-tar is effective in reducing the risks of smoking, we should observe data and statistics of experiments.
So far as I know, the election system of the CAE doesn’t restrict candidates’ research fields. Besides, only academicians can vote for candidates without collecting public opinion. If people have complaints about those rules, they can discuss them with the CAE and suggest revising them. But it’s a totally different issue from Xie’s election. People shouldn’t have criticized Xie based on rules that they assume appropriate. Also, they shouldn’t have criticized Xie as if they are more noble than him.
Wang Guorong (Qianjiang Evening News): Smoking is bad for health. Therefore, we do need research on how to reduce the risk of it to the greatest extent. It’s unrealistic to eliminate the tobacco industry within a short period of time or to ask all smokers to quit as soon as possible. If smoking can’t be banned for now, isn’t it a good thing to research how to reduce its harm? Before being elected, Xie received many national prizes and has been an outstanding contributor for China’s tobacco system for 19 years. He didn’t encourage people to smoke but has made efforts on how to reduce its harm. There are hundreds of millions of smokers in China, and studies on how to reduce the harm of it are quite necessary.
If you have an opinion on smoking, you shouldn’t take your anger out on Xie. It’s not right to give him such harsh criticism.
Shameful election
Xu Guihua (news.xinhuanet.com): Low-tar doesn’t mean less harm. Using low-tar cigarettes to reduce the risks of smoking was long ago proven unscientific. In the 1950s, in order to maintain profits for the tobacco industry, European and American tobacco companies started to research low-tar cigarettes and used them in their promotional efforts. For more than 50 years, the percent of tar in cigarettes has been reduced by nearly 60 percent but the resulting diseases haven’t lessened at all. Facing scientific evidence, tobacco companies have to admit reducing the risks of smoking by using low-tar cigarettes has been a total failure. The WHO has warned that all tobacco products, including low-tar ones, are harmful to human health. In 2005, China ratified the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, endorsing guidelines for its implementation with government support. It’s a pity that Xie could still be elected academician six years after the convention was ratified in China.
The promotion of low-tar cigarettes has misled the public. An investigation conducted by the University of Waterloo in Canada shows 86 percent of Chinese agree with the concept of “lower tar, less harm” and 54 percent of doctors even agree with it. The misleading promotion has added to difficulties in the country’s smoking-control efforts.
In the future, the government should curtail funding on research that has been banned by a WHO-initiated treaty, and should put the money to better use for implementing the convention in China and reducing the number of smokers by helping them quit in a better and more efficient way.
Pan Hongqi (Beijing Youth Daily): Questioning the tobacco academician is bringing back the truth and conscience of science. What people really care about is whether Xie’s research has really made tremendous and creative contributions to reducing the harm of cigarettes and protecting people’s health.
The WHO has emphasized many times that all tobacco products, including low-tar cigarettes, are harmful for human beings. It’s quite irresponsible for the elite CAE to give Xie the title of academician. It will discredit China’s smoking-control efforts, which need concerted strength from all circles of society. It will bring a misleading concept for common people and have huge negative influence for the smoking-control authorities in the country.
Wang Shichuan (China Youth Daily): Xie’s research involves studies on human health and his election should have been approved by prestigious experts working in the medical field.
Xie is famous for his research on reducing the harm of cigarettes. But the FCTC has specifically pointed out that any terms about low-tar cigarettes are fake and misleading to smokers. Further evidence is that the death rate of lung cancer has increased rapidly over these years.
This is not the first time that Xie became one of the candidates for the CAE academi- cians. Xie applied for the honor in 2007, 2009 and 2011. Why should he be successfully elected this time but not four years ago or two years ago? It’s impossible that his research achievements have changed a lot during this short period of time.
Although Xie is only a researcher, the institute he works for is affiliated with the China National Tobacco Corp. Once Xie is widely known as a CAE academician, the concept of “low-tar cigarettes” will be legitimized. Tobacco companies who use “lowtar” in their promotional activities will have more courage and evidence to do it in the future. Smokers will have more reasons to avoid quitting the bad habit because they will assume low-tar will bring less harm to their bodies. All these will make the tobacco industry more powerful and help smoking expand more quickly in China.
Qiao Hongge (Shanxi Evening News): Academician is the highest honor for scientists in China. It shouldn’t be an honor that can be given as a present randomly but should be conferred to the best researcher. And “best”means his or her research fruits should give ordinary people more happiness, push forward social progress and help the development of all human beings. It’s almost a laughing stock that a scientist working on tobacco science could be given a seat in the elite CAE.
Besides, it is an internationally common practice that science and research institutes should distance themselves from tobacco interests while, in this case, the institute Xie works for is affiliated to China’s largest to- bacco company and most of its research is sponsored by the tobacco industry. How can we believe in the results of Xie’s research?
Wang Ke’an (China Youth Daily): In foreign countries, the government should never sponsor this kind of research, which not only doesn’t protect people’s health but could increase the number of smokers. Researchers in the United States discovered that low-tar cigarettes don’t reduce the risk of lung cancer.
There is no safe level of tobacco consumption. Smokers are more likely to inhale more when they consume low-tar cigarettes, and that actually increases the health risks.